“There is no gas shortage but Washington, Wall Street, and ethanol and oil and gas companies want you to think there is, says automotive expert Ed Wallace

“‘They see speculation in the market, I see decline in global inventories. I don’t think this is a big surprise, that we’ve had a jump in price when there has been a decrease in crude inventories.’ — Energy Secretary Sam Bodman, Bloomberg News, Mar. 5, 2008

“‘It should be obvious to you all that the [gasoline] demand is outstripping supply, which causes prices to go up.’ — President George W. Bush, Associated Press, Mar. 5, 2008

“One wonders if verifiable facts ever get in the way of this administration’s statements on issues that are critical to the average American’s wellbeing. …

“Obviously, the two quotes [above] came from discussions concerning the current high price for oil on the futures market. Bodman appears to be protecting the speculators in oil, as opposed to looking after the interests of all Americans. President Bush, apparently, has never talked to the Energy Dept.’s Energy Information Agency to see whether gasoline demand is actually up. More troubling, the writer of that particular Associated Press article obviously didn’t look up the EIA’s numbers to verify the President’s assertions. They weren’t accurate.

“1. There Is No Shortage

“Gasoline reserves on hand are at the highest levels since the early 1990s, which is remarkable considering the nation’s refineries have been cutting back on the production of gasoline because their margins have declined.

“In fact, average gasoline reserves on hand have risen since this past October, while oil reserves in this country have gone up virtually every week this year ….

“In the same Bloomberg article that quotes from Bodman’s CNBC appearance on Mar. 4, he also said that it was thanks to ethanol that the gasoline problem isn’t even worse. He then added that the fact that making ethanol is forcing up prices of other farm commodities … is ‘nowhere near as important as trying to relieve pressure on [gasoline] supplies.’ … Bodman’s statement must have made eyes roll … at Pilgrim’s Pride PPC; the … poultry … company’s outlay for chicken feed went up $600 million last fiscal year and was on track to increase by another $700 million this year.

“Here’s the scorecard, in case you missed it. There’s no shortage of gasoline or oil in the U.S. today, and we have near-record reserves on hand. Meanwhile the Congressional mandate for ethanol has jacked up the price of chicken feed for Pilgrim’s Pride, … the U.S.’s largest processor of chickens and turkeys — by $1.3 billion. And that’s for just one company processing chicken. This is what passes for acceptable to our Energy Secretary?

“2. Demand Is DOWN, Yet Prices Are UP

“Just so we can all get on the same page, here are the verifiable facts on oil supplies, production, and gasoline demand.

“In January of this year, the U.S. used 4% less petroleum than we did a year ago …. [D]emand has been falling … since July of last year. … [W]orldwide production of oil has risen …. The net result is that the U.S. daily buffer for oil production against demand, which was a paltry 1.5 million barrels as recently as 2005, is now up to 3 million barrels in excess capacity today.

“So what is going on here? Why would our Energy Secretary say there’s a supply and demand problem when none exists? Why would he say that speculators have little or nothing to do with the incredibly high price of oil and gasoline, when it’s clear they do? President Bush — a former oilman — gives the ever-growing demand for gasoline as the primary reason prices are so high, yet that notion can be dispelled with one minute of research. …

“3. Speculation is Up, and the Dollar Is Down

“On the same day the President and our Energy Secretary made those foolish comments, no less an authority than ExxonMobil (XOM) Chief Executive Officer Rex Tillerson was quoted by Marketwatch as saying, ‘The record run in oil prices is related more to speculation and a weakening dollar than supply and demand in the market.’ …

” … [I]n 2000 approximately $9 billion was invested in oil futures, while today that number has gone up to $250 billion. Now, if any publicly traded company had an additional $241 billion put into its stock in the same period, its stock would rise out of sight too ….

“Moving on to the weak U.S. dollar as a primary cause for skyrocketing oil prices — there is ‘some’ truth in that statement. But … [t]he dollar has depreciated 30% against the world’s currencies since 2002, while the price of oil has gone up 500%. So is it the weak dollar that has caused a 500% increase in the price of oil, or is it the extra $241 billion worth of speculation? You can make the call on that one.

” … Goldman Sachs … forecast on Mar. 7 that turbulence in the oil market could cause oil to spike as high as $200 a barrel. This flies in the face of all known information —but … Goldman Sachs is the world’s biggest trader of energy derivatives ….

“What Is Washington Thinking?

“Rounding out the list of experts discussing our oil and gasoline situation is Bill Klesse, head of San Antonio (Tex.) Valero Energy (VLO). He spoke in San Diego a week after those comments from Goldman Sachs, the President, and Secretary Bodman.

“Believe it or not, Klesse said poor margins may cause Valero to sell one-third of its refinery operations; he stated that poor margins in recent months had caused planned refinery expansions — which would have produced 500,000 more barrels per day — to be canceled. Moreover, according to a report from Reuters on Mar. 11, 2008, Klesse recently released the information that gasoline production has been curtailed in response to slowing demand.

“Imagine that: Refiners cut gasoline production, yet gasoline reserves have grown to their largest since late 1992. So much for ‘surging demand.’ …

“Which takes us back to the original question: Why is Washington doing everything it can to convince us there is a shortage when there isn’t one? After all, the only people they’re protecting are those heavily invested in oil futures … to the detriment of all other Americans.

“We’re Paying for What?

” … [T]he Bush administration is protecting those responsible for creating … [a] speculative bubble in oil futures, and is protecting investors in the ethanol industry … to the detriment of food-processing companies such as Pilgrim’s Pride.

“And the net result of all this is that the prices of crude and gasoline rise ever higher thanks to a ‘shortage’ that does not exist, while food costs are soaring thanks … to the ethanol mandate.

“The Federal Reserve lowers interest rates, but the cost of mortgages goes up six weeks in a row — and last month Bank of America (BAC) credit-card holders started being charged more than 24% interest on new purchases.

“This is what they call ‘Republican Prosperity?’ … Instead of a fair and open market they gave us a free-for-all marketplace with no regulations at all, which … these ‘bubble boys’ have sent south for all of us.”

Roger Rabbit Note: Ed Wallace is a business and automotive journalist from Dallas, Texas.

Roger Rabbit Commentary: Well, there you have it folks: Socialist propaganda from the flaming left-wing political publication Business Week. The Bush administration is screwing you at the gas pump and grocery checkout. Another fucking ripoff by Republican laissez faire capitalism. In the old days, pirates who plundered the high seas were hanged. Maybe that custom should be revived.*

*Just kidding! Ann Coulter joke. I’ll settle for booting these GOP buccaneers out of office. Meanwhile, next time you see a righty bitching about the high cost of filling up his SUV, send him the link to this article and tell him to shut up because he created this problem by voting for these thieves.

Figger it. Since we all know #1 doesn’t set the price, how does marching them into congress do anything except put on a big show?

Ed Markey is a 100% east coast Taxachusetts jerk! And most here fall for it.

Correctnotright placed here three times the argument Reagan shutdown the Carter alternatives fuel plan. Well I did a little research in it because Puddy likes to destroy correctnotright strawmen whenever possible.

Carter in 1979 wanted to rid us of foreign oil dependence. He made a grandiose statement on national TV. At the time OPEC set the price at $37.00. The alternative fuels project had apprximately $88 Billion pumped into it to research and create alternative fuels. When OPEC dropped the price of oil from the 1979 high of $37 to the 1986 low of $14 per barrel, the alternative fuels project was no longer financially viable. Reagan killed the program because it was costing more money to make a barrel of alternative fuel than the selling price.

Now you know the truth, something incorrectneverbright decidedly left from his discussions. There are many web sites you can find on Carter and Reagan and alternative fuels. Since I was accused of biasing Hannah with the nine web sites I gave her in early March, I’ll let the vitriolic 16%ers look up the facts and see where Puddy went wrong…

Excellent question Daddy Love. When I started looking into the alt fuels argument I started reading about the coal into synthetic oil. There is a big gotcha the environmentalist whack-jobs will scream about: creating a synthetic fuel from coal generates far more carbon dioxide, which per Al Gore contributes to global warming, almost as much as his bellicose mouth. So the CO2 emissions for this process is “worse” than producing vehicle fuel from oil or using ordinary natural gas. SO are they gonna buy those credits from the Al Gore Carbon Credit Society? Also in my readings these alternative fuels projects already underway with coal have no financial incentive to capture carbon dioxide emissions beyond the small minute amount that they can sell for industrial use. You know the CO2 cylinders for soda pop, etc.

Daddy Love have you been paying attention to my corn into ethanol argument? How about the rise in food costs I put forth?

Since corn is the major feed staple for beef, pork and sheep, the farmer pays more for corn. The price of meat goes up. Corn is used in many products, from table syrup for pancakes to soda pop. Those prices are rising due to the ethanol for fuels projects. I’ve placed these arguments here before. SeattleJew you said I needed to raise my discourse level. I have many times to the ridicule of the 16%ers.

Have you been paying attention to the extra water usage from the Ogalalla Aquifer? Have you been paying attention to my dead zones arguments in the Gulf of Mexico? I’ve placed these arguments here before. SeattleJew you said I needed to raise my discourse level. I have many times to the ridicule of the 16%ers.

Puddy has placed these PuddyFacts on this blog before. I’ve placed these arguments here many times. But your 16%er friends ridicule truths because they are anti-oil but offer no real alternatives.

How about the destruction of forestation in Indonesia and Brazil due to these ethenol projects. Puddy was the first to place these arguments here and others on my side later posted other facts. SeattleJew you said I needed to raise my discourse level. I have many times to the ridicule of the 16%ers. Yet the virulent, obnoxious 16%ers went off again…

It’s hard to debate with facts when your opponent’s mind is already set.

Wall Street Journal – you know – the paper of record for the GOP – has a story today saying that McCain is striking out with the faaar right wackjobs who really run the republican party. If the 16% of republicans who beat their kids, kill puppies, wave the Confederate Flag, lynch blacks, believe God should sit in the White House and who appreciate a man with a wide stance don’t vote for McCain – he’s not only out of the picture – it’s a landslide.

@20: sorry Puddy – your argument about the oil companies “only” making .000whatever is pure BS – look up the profits for the oil companies. Exxon has TWICE in the last 4 years made more money than any other corporation in HISTORY. Once again you pick out the wrong “fact” and neglect the bigger story.

These are OBSCENE profits on the back of the average working Joe. I guess you support monopolies and their ability to manipulate production, refinement, and selling of petroleum products – not to mention what it does to our trade deficit and economy. Of course Enron manipulated the market and then went belly up – they contributed 1.3 million to their buddy GWB (former oil exec. until he drovew his company under) and weere the only energy company to sit down with Dick cheney (formerly of Haliburton). We are in the energy mess becaue this WAS the policy of Dick cheney – no incentives for alternative fuel, cut mass transit and rely on oil as we invade Iraq (it has all worked out so well for the Bush administration buddies in the oil business – remember Bush called Ken Lay of Enron “kenny boy”.

“If all the automobiles in the United States were fueled with 100 percent ethanol, a total of about 97 percent of U.S. land area would be needed to grow the corn feedstock. Corn would cover nearly the total land area of the United States.”

Now there are many more cars on the road 7 years later….

But wait Daddy Love… these two will figger out a way to blame it on GWB. Watch this thread…

Neverbrightmajorlyincorrect@20: I gave GBS the breakdown from three independent non-oil financed evenly based studies of gasoline costs and oil industry profits. Why do you not read? Scared you’ll lose your factless argument? Place some well known real URLs to deflate my argument. I calculated at $100/barrel the price of gas within 0.006 cents idiot! I gave the URLs so everyone could take me on. Only you try and there are no facts to your argument. Only conjecture and innuendo.

GBS and I discussed this at lunch. He didn’t disagree with me. In fact when I delivered my cost analysis for all to see here. I am still waiting for your facts.

Oh boy the Enron argument. Do you know who Enron contributed to? Oh yeah I placed this PuddyFact many moons ago. Only you are left with the Enron argument in your puny arsenal. Do you drink from the same warm white sticky kool-aid source of Clueless Idiot. Your arguments are strangely similar.

As I said before oil companies make 9.5 cents profit per dollar not per gallon fool.

So notverybrightstillincorrect, who sets the price of oil? Still waiting for the answer.

Just blew your crap out of the water again Puddy: Three links on the record profits of Exxon (took me all of 2 minutes) – what do you have – Nothing. Keep defending record oil company profits – it makes you look like a fool. You are in favor of monopolies gouging the average consumer. Profits don’t lie.

“Also, the production of corn ethanol is highly subsidized: State and federal governments pay out more than $6 billion per year in subsidies, according to a 2006 report from the International Institute for Sustainable Development in Geneva, Switzerland. Calculated on a per-gallon basis, these subsidies are more than 60 times those for gasoline.”

Wait a minute… didn’t I hear Ed Markey and his savant congressional buddies cry about the “oil tax subsidies”?

“Oil and gas profits rise and fall in cycles, analysts say. As recently as the fourth quarter of 2001, when oil prices were significantly lower, Exxon reported profit that was still robust but just a quarter of the level reported Monday.”

Where have you destroyed my argument? Still waiting…

How am I defending oil profits when I gave everyone the breakdown.

Let me say it again fool – for each $ in price the oil companies make 9.5 cents profit. So they are making over 30 cents profit per gallon. Where do they set the price. Still waiting for the answer Fool@25. I have stated this over and over.

What are your links proving except I’m right. Damn you are 100% all-beef jackASS. Keep up the good work…

I know that Enron was the primary backer of your buddy GWB – to the tune of 1.3 million. the GWB knew Kenny boy Lay so well he had a nickname for him and that enron was the ONLY company to get a personal sit down meeting with Dick Cheney.

They control the prudcution the refineries and the distribution – that is scalled a monopoly and the two biggest companies (Exxon among them) set the price and theothers follow (also a monoppoly). They have record profits – as the links noted. You got nothin’ again. What does it matter about your stupid calculation on one aspect of oil prices? – they control the whole thing – and they have had record profits – more than any other coporation in history – thanks to GWB – your buddypuddy.

If incorrectnotbright investigates the house values six of the top ten Enron contribution recipients are Donkey: Sheila Jackson Lee, Ken Bentsen, Martin Frost, Charles Stenholm, and Chet Edwards. What is the telling artifact here,? They’re all from Texas. So to me so what. GWB was from Texas. Stupid argument like always from alwaysbellicoseneverright.

So novercorrectnottobright: When you really dissect the opensecrets values for Enron contributions your Donkey party got almost $1 million of the soft money. I assume you can handle a spreadsheet better than Your Clueless Idiot. Do congressional Donkey feel all that Enron contribution money corrupted their policy judgments?

Do you bring any facts Clueless Idiot besides being dumb, stupid and an idiot?

You can’t even tell us what you paid in taxes for 2007. R U afraid we can figger out your salary? I could care less. I am interested in the tax the rich argument you and others promulgate all the time here. Or as some of us suspect you live in the basement of momma’s domicile?

Did your momma know any of those 5000 millionaires who said goodbye to California over the past few years?

The problem with the entire fuel price debate discussion is that NONE of this has to do with fairness. It ALL has to do with the failure of ur system to deal with an industry that can set its prices with no fear of competition .. that is an industry that operates outside of the free market.

Discussing “profit” as a proportion of the price of fuel is silly. The cost of delivering a gallon of gas at $4/ gal or $.5/gal is likley to be very similar. So where is the the $3.50?

Some part of that comes from the cost of oil. That is set outside the US by a cartel that does use a somewhat competitive market model. BUT changes in that part of the $3.50 have very little effect on the companies return on investment .. i.e. it profits as opposed to its margin.

So, my question is a simple one, how does the free markjet for fuel actually work in the US? Why is it so heavily influenced by the barrel cost that a 10% increase in the cost of a barrel, results in a 25% increase in pump price?

Put another way, ALL the oil companies now do is distribute a product .. they are in effect retailers. BUT .. why is there not a Wallmart effect? Are these retailers really competing with each other? How come I never hear of a sale by BP ?

I wonder if there is not a free market solution to fule price profit gouging?

Remember Bill Clinton invited Ken Lay to a Lincoln Bedroom sleepover. And helped him with plans for an Afghanistan pipeline. And let him write parts of the Kyoto Protocol that were favorable to Enron. And took Enron campaign contributions.

Some of the above assertions are in dispute, so check with Enron pimp Paul Krugman to get the inside poop.

For once Puddy is right about one thing: Soylent Gas from corn squeezin’s should be a non-starter, because it’s already driving food prices higher, and the production of ethanol from corn consumes considerably more petroleum than it replaces. However, it’s highly profitable because of Uncle Fed’s corn subsidy, which was originally supposed to help Ma and Pa down on the Family Farm, but now helps Archer Daniels Midland. ADM in turn can afford to line the pockets of politicians on both sides of the aisle, so we can expect this nonsense to continue no matter which party prevails in the coming election.

“Oops! – Time to quit posting…I am looking like Roger hogging the blog!!”

Many excellent posts from me, who reminds me of me, but about Roger we disagree. I’ve made peace with my inner rodent, and have attained a Satori state of serenity, tranquility, and peace with Roger’s frenetic pelletistic posting.

I haven’t made peace with Roger’s collusion with Darryl to hack Hannah’s IP, or with Pope Richard Pope (“R U cute?”) to hack or whack Hannah by snorping thru his data bases to snarf her out.

@47 – “I haven’t made peace with Roger’s collusion with Darryl to hack Hannah’s IP, or with Pope Richard Pope (”R U cute?”) to hack or whack Hannah by snorping thru his data bases to snarf her out.”

Such wonderful people they are, trustworthy, honest, respectful..(sarcasim) Funny thing is, they never proved a thing, still haven’t! Because there is no proof of me being anything other than that what I have claimed. I actually made a report about me being snarfed out to the proper peole!

SeattleJew: You agitated: “Discussing “profit” as a proportion of the price of fuel is silly.”

Coming from this backgound in earlier years, every company invests in oil distillation columns, piping systems, tank farms, ingress and egress piping facilities. Basically all these costs are the same. So… the costs to make gas are similar across the various companies.

But I didn’t create the profit argument. I used what other sites use ad the argument. On average the profit is 9.5cent per dollar. Check it out for yourself. That’s how I got the $100/oil barrel price down to $3.406 per gallon when I did the calculation. I did it right on this site and gave the URLs for all to see. Yet you all attack me when all I did was walk through the price with the federal and state taxes added in the end.

Now I agree their profits are high. I never said anything otherwise. But when you sift the stupidity of correctnotright’s argument one can see all the truck size holes in it.

I received an important email today. It talks about vets. Note that cowardly traitors, chickenhawks and punks like Puddy won’t care about this. They support any war they don’t have to fight in. But freedom-loving Americans should take note:

Robert Lopez served 8 years in our military, fighting in Iraq as a tank commander. He was told he’d get his whole education bill paid for when he got out of the service, but like so many others, Mr. Lopez has faced the bleak reality of a government that has turned its back on its veterans.

That is why Senators Jim Webb and Chuck Hagel proposed the new GI Bill, which would bring back WWII-style standards of providing vets with full tuition, room and board. And that is why 51 senators have signed on, including 9 Republicans like John Warner, giving this GI Bill tremendous bipartisan support.

But it isn’t enough. Faced with unprecedented filibusters, the only way to ensure Senate passage of the GI Bill is to get 60 co-sponsors. So far, John McCain has refused. The same McCain who insists he supports our troops. The same McCain who is voting lockstep with the Bush administration (who have also resisted this bill). We need to get John McCain to lead — to sign now and signal to other Republican leaders that we should be strongly behind our vets.

Robert Lopez thinks John McCain ought to stand in his shoes to know how difficult it is to be a vet and have to pay staggering education costs. THIS is your call to arms. Pass the video along and implore your friends to sign the petition.

Our government owes our troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan the opportunity to receive full educational benefits. These patriots have fought hard for our government; it’s time our government started fighting hard for them.

Hannah, for Clueless Idiot to actually say something worthwhile he’d have to think. As you can see thinking and Clueless Idiot are not in the same body. He would need an OOBE (out of body experience) to have that occur.

He has few argument items in his arsenal and he repeats himself all the time…

And let us all remember, there are plenty of oil wells in Texas and Oklahoma that are economically unproductive(costs to produce a barrel of oil exceeds oil price per barrel) at $50 a barrel, but become money printers at $60-80 a barrel.

But, I am sure in your mind, that is all just a big co-ink-E-dink, puddingdick. Yep, The family Bush just happens to rule at a time when oil prices go through the roof, enriching all their political supporters, and making many wells in West Texas productive again.

How someone who can read so much, do so much research, and still be an absolute idiot is the thing that charms me the most about you, PuddingDick.

So by your weak argument above, Bush has the special blue phone calling the New York Mercantile Exchange asking them to bid up the price of oil so he can make a profit on his oil fields? And you went all the way back to Sunday June 16, 2002 to make your puny point?

It has nothing to do with China, India, Korea and other nations using more oil every year and idiots like your hero Hugo Chavez who recently was caught supplying materiel to the Columbian rebels making anti-US and oil cutting off statements. Or the attacks on Saudi Oil Fields?

Nope it’s just GWB and his need to finance his retirement spot in Abu Dhabi.

I mean, how can anyone ignore everything that has gone wrong in this country over the 7 1/2 years, or fail to blame it on the party in power? Everything is falling apart in this country, and it takes willful stupidity to not see Republican culpability in the situation.

@59 – I don’t know who you support, I support Obama, but I am so sick of left against right all these years, it’s sick. No wonder our country is in the mess it’s in! While Clinton was prez, the right blamed him for everything, now since Bush has been prez the left blame everything on him. It’s a vicious circle of the blame game with no resolutions to fix the problems! Just drives me nuts! I feel like the politicians are acting like 5 year olds!!! “Well Johnny did it so why can’t I?”

@71 – Another great example of childish behavior! Keep it up, only shows the readers what you really are. When you start acting like an adult (not sure if you are just a spoiled rich kid) we will listen to you.

No, actually my post was about you being a fucking idiot who thinks he has all the answers.

Idiot part: 1)Bringing Hugo Chavez into the argument. 2)Absolute blind side to the fact that markets are manipulated by vested interests that are directly connected to the Bush family.

Hey PuddingDick: Could you please entertain us all your explanation of how the war on Iraq has nothing to do with Big oil/Herbert/Walker/Bush trying to secure the second largest known oil deposits in the world?

I provide the anti-dote to 16%er Moonbattiness. If I was an idiot like Clueless Idiot I would have whipped out the Al Gore and Occidental Oil argument. Except Pussuckadyke, he sold his oil stock long ago.

Every market is manipulated, from meats, dairy, all the way to airline prices. Did you know that?

You see Pussuckadyke, while you are watching “oil” through your lefty friends URL I’ve been watching real news:

There are lots and lots of corporations who manage to convince the IRS they’re not making any “profits” at all…but their executives are billionaires and their shareholders are all wearing shit-eating grins. Well, they were until the last few months, anyway.

Was there still an issue to be found amid this morass of ding-drubbing? If I scroll far enough toward the top, I believe a thought or two which germanely addresses a salient or prevailing point is expressed.

I frankly admit a lack of familiarity with “tax cuts for the rich” or “modest middle class cuts”; its been some time since I’ve posessed income or property sufficient to engender concern or warrant scrutiny.

From this layman’s perspective, tax cuts mean decreasing revenue for the government, which implies decreased spending in the programs it administrates. Isn’t the reason for taxation to provide a means by which the govermnemt of a nation can meet the needs of its trust? If this is true, those who have benefitted the most from the opportunities (those in the highest income brackets) should view it as a civic responsibility to bear the greatest burden of taxation. Those in the middle class should also bear a share. Those who live at or below the poverty level are the ones whom I would like to believe benefit most from (and are most in need of) government programs of assistance.

Certainly it could be argued that without an incentive in the form of tax protections, the very wealthy would move their assets to another place more beneficial. It could also be argued that equitable taxation would be based on a scale of contribution to the GDP. And it could be argued that those who consume the majority of those program dollars should bear the lion’s share of their replenishment costs.

100 – You ignore the fact that the middle class in this country has stood still in terms of standard of living for 30 years. Even gone backwards if you realize that millions of women and even children now labor to make ends meet.

All that has been proposed in this thread is that the current Bush tax cuts for the rich be allowed to expire. The Clinton era tax rates did NOT plunge the economy in recession as the right wing claimed – just the opposite.

Interest on the national debt is a huge and ever growing component of government spending. Someone has to relieve the burden of the Bush era’s profligate spending and disastrous foreign policies. It can’t come from the working and middle classes – they’re tapped out.

@101 The term ‘ignore’ seems to carry the connotation of willful disregard. Such was certainly not my intent. Although a complete analysis of the American standard of living — 1978 and 2008 — seems beyond the scope of a blog, I will admit that there is truth in your statement. But not the whole truth.

In 1978, the American public enjoyed nothing approaching the current ease of access to luxuries and necessities. Does that mean our standard of living is ‘higher’ at present? Perhaps. It largely depends on how -you- define ‘standard of living’. If it is qualified by income in relation to cost of goods, it remains almost an impossible comparison; there are goods and services now available, to which Americans in 1978 enjoyed very little access. There are goods and services now which did not even exist then.

Taken holistically, ‘standard of living’ is a bit harder to nail down.

“www.investorwords.com” defines ‘standard of living’ as, “The financial health of a population, as measured by the quantity of consumption by the members of that population. The measure most frequently used to estimate standard of living is gross national income per capita. One drawback to the standard of living measurement is that it does not take into account some factors which are important but hard to quantify, such as crime rate or environmental impact.”

Whereas “www.answers.com” defines it as, “A level of material comfort as measured by the goods, services, and luxuries available to an individual, group, or nation.”

As we see, there is a significant disparity in the results and the tools of their measurement, necessitated by a difference in definition. We must first decide if we are speaking in terms of the nation as a whole, or in terms of the individual.

On to the substance of your second paragraph. I agree. It would seem irrational not to agree with your statement.

As regards your statements in paragraph 3: Are you stating your belief that a allowing tax cuts for the rich to expire would achieve significant results in relieving the burden of the spending and policies you describe?

Let us not forget that to this date “YLB” is still for real unemployed….next please. Taxpayer=valid opinion, non-taxpayer=0/non-valid opinion. To YLB: Run along back to Momma’s basement little one, the adults are talking. Simple as that.

SETEC Astronomy – In a previous thread Cynical discussed he paid close to $100K in income and dividend taxes. HAs Clueless Idiot@100 blathered on about this and other worthless tax the rich topics so I challenged him. I told him I paid more in taxes than him and I gave more in charitable contributions than he paid in taxes.

He tried to turn the argument about Richard Mellon Scaife and his newspapers. I asked WTF does that have to do with Clueless Idiot and his taxpaying prowess. I then mentioned to him the URLs I placed here weeks ago where 5000 millionaires have left California over their tax the rich scheme. Now California has a massive budget deficit. Well there is only so much juice you can squeeze from a orange. Then Clueless Idiot tried to argue Prop 13 was the reason California is in the budget straits their in. I again asked what does this have to do with his tax paying prowess in WA State.

His next line and I love it as it’s his broken record “I don’t take orders from you”.

So SETEC Astronomy, you are now caught up in the milquetoast mind of Clueless Idiot. No matter how many tax data you deliver to him, in his mind a poor person will create wealth and open a business so others can have a job.

ByeByeGOP, remember I have a lovely female roommate. Oh yeah GBS told you to stop discussing my roommate since you were a no show at lunch and at DL the same night. I hear Rosy Palm is looking for a date.

@108 The picture begins to take focus, though I’m still trying to adjust the horizontal and the vertical…

WA has no individual income tax.

Aside from paying and additional .089% in King Co for a cup of Shari’s coffee, or working up the courage to cross “Galloping Gurdey” at the Narrows, what WA taxes would amount to $100K? Are we discussing Washington’s property taxation, profits from a business, or has the issue always included non-State taxes?

Please Donate

I appreciate feeling appreciated. Also, money.

Currency:

Amount:

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.